Case law

Clary v. Alexander County Board of Education

286 N.C. 525 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 12, 1975

, waiver of governmental immunity to any extent was sufficient to preclude the granting of motions for directed verdicts on the ground of governmental immunity. … A directed verdict will not be entered on the ground of contributory negligence unless the evidence, taken in the light most favorable to plaintiff, so clearly establishes contributory negligence that no other reasonable

Happel v. Guilford Cnty. Bd. of Educ.

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 21, 2025

The Framers clearly intended federal law to trump conflicting state law, even state constitutional law. … (conditioning liability immunity for program planners and qualified persons on their “reasonabl[e] belie[f]” that the recipient was in the geographic area covered by the declaration).

Hill v. Stubhub, Inc.

2011 NCBC 7 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 28, 2011

It is not entitled to immunity. It does not qualify as a Good Samaritan. … The facts set out above clearly establish that StubHub’s actions were “in and affecting commerce” as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1. {53} There are class action issues remaining to be decided.

Stone v. City of Fayetteville

3 N.C. App. 261 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 18, 1968

Asheville, supra, clearly established governmental immunity for North Carolina municipal corporations from wrongful death actions arising from the operation of a public sewerage system. Williams v. … Greenville, supra, appears to establish the principle for a facility maintained by a city for sewerage and drainage. James v. Charlotte, supra, applies the doctrine to a sanitation department maintained by a city.

Hoke v. Board of Medical Examiners

445 F. Supp. 1313 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 23, 1978

Assuming, but not deciding, that Anderson’s investigative activities would be subject to a qualified immunity only, there is a question whether the individual Board members should be held liable under the principle of respondeat … While it does not appear that Paris would be entitled to the protection of any absolute or qualified immunity, a review of the record also leaves the court unclear as to just what Paris’ involvement is alleged to have been

Petroleum Traders Corp. v. State

190 N.C. App. 542 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 20, 2008

Defendants assert that the Declaratory Judgment Act does not waive sovereign immunity, and Plaintiff concedes that it “has not relied on the Declaratory Judgment Act to establish the absence of sovereign immunity.” … We agree, and conclude that the waiver of sovereign immunity established by Corum does not extend to Count I or II of Plaintiff’s complaint.

Galeas v. Inpold

845 F. Supp. 2d 685 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 28, 2012

Defendant also contends that she is entitled to qualified immunity. … Because the Court finds that there was no constitutional violation in the first instance, the Court need not address Defendant's qualified immunity argument. ’

Bostic Packaging, Inc. v. City of Monroe

149 N.C. App. 825 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 16, 2002

The Court stated that the “establishment and construction of a sewer system by a municipality are governmental functions entitling it to immunity from negligence.” Id. at 610 , 261 S.E.2d at 300-01 . … immunity.

ROGERS v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 11, 2022

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally ate shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Thus, the traditional two-step qualified immunity inquity requires a court to determine: “(1) whether the official violated a constitutional right; and if so, (2) whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time

McWilliams v. Parham

269 N.C. 162 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 20, 1967

It is well established in this jurisdiction that assumption of risk is not available as a defense to one not in a contractual relationship to the plaintiff. Clark v. … contributory negligence, which the defendant has alleged in his first further answer and defense, and which is in no way affected by our decision upon the matters now before us, and the defense of assumption of the risk is clearly

North Carolina Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Board of Trustees

364 N.C. 102 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 15, 2010

The legislature has clearly waived sovereign immunity through the Workers’ Compensation Act for claims by governmental employees, and this waiver applies to the provisions of the Guaranty Act involving workers’ compensation … This interpretation follows the longstanding requirement that a statutory waiver of immunity be strictly construed, in accordance with a clearly expressed legislative intent.

Combs v. Town of Belhaven, NC

106 N.C. App. 71 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 7, 1992

According to G.S. 160A-485(a), however, a town may waive this immunity by purchasing liability insurance. … These contractual provisions clearly exclude coverage for the claims set forth by plaintiff. Coverage A, however, does not contain an exclusion for such acts committed by a Law Enforcement Employee.

Alston v. North Carolina a & T State University

304 F. Supp. 2d 774 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 6, 2004

NC A & T qualifies as a state institution. See N.C. Gen.Stat. §§ 150B-2(1a); 116-4; Roberson v. Dale, 464 F.Supp. 680, 689 (M.D.N.C.1979). … The Fourth Circuit has not conclusively established whether a dismissal based on Eleventh Amendment immunity is a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) or for failure to state a claim under

Kroh v. Kroh

152 N.C. App. 347 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 20, 2002

We conclude that the record on appeal supports the trial court’s determination that Teresa Kroh acted with actual malice, thus negating any qualified immunity she otherwise would have enjoyed under G.S. § 7B-309 for her statements … immunity under G.S. § 7B-309.

Broadwell v. United States

234 F. Supp. 17 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 14, 1964

It is not a waiver by the government of immunity from suit, but presupposes waiver of immunity under some other statutory provision. See: First National Bank of Emlenton, Pennsylvania v. … Nor have they clearly established, as required by the rule in Enochs, supra, “that under no circumstances could the government ultimately prevail” in this ease.

Ladd v. Funderburk

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 18, 2022

However, denial of a motion for summary judgment ‘on the grounds of sovereign and qualified immunity is immediately appealable.’ ” Epps v. Duke Univ., 122 N.C. … FUNDERBURK 2022-NCCOA-676 Opinion of the Court “three-step inquiry” established in Estate of Williams v.

Wilkerson v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

151 N.C. App. 332 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 16, 2002

It is only when an individual pleads qualified immunity or public officer immunity that the distinction between discretionary and ministerial acts is important. … This testimony clearly supports the finding that the City did not waive its immunity regarding the improvement project.

Anderson Ex Rel. Jerome v. Town of Andrews

127 N.C. App. 599 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 4, 1997

In general, municipalities in North Carolina are immune from liability for their negligent acts arising out of governmental activities unless the municipality waives such immunity by purchasing liability insurance. … However, recent case law clearly establishes that if immunity is raised as a basis in the motion for summary adjudication, a substantial right is affected and the denial is immediately appealable. 2 Thus, as to the issue

Ray v. B. Keith Forgy, M.D., P.A.

245 N.C. App. 430 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 16, 2016

Lastly, the trial court issued a qualified protective order authorizing the disclosure of log 305 to plaintiffs. … KEITH FORGY, M.D., PA., Opinion of the Court affidavits and the Medical Staff bylaws of Grace to establish that their MRCs qualified as MRCs pursuant to the meaning contemplated

Barfield v. North Carolina Department of Crime Control & Public Safety

202 N.C. App. 114 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 19, 2010

“It has long been established that an action cannot be maintained against the *119 State of North Carolina or an agency thereof unless it consents to be sued or upon its waiver of immunity, and that this immunity is absolute … “Waiver of sovereign immunity may not be lightly inferred and State statutes waiving this immunity, being in derogation of the sovereign right to immunity, must be strictly construed.”